Gardner-Webb University
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 560529972
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Boiling Springs, NC, USA
- Phone
- (704) 406-4270
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- University or Technological Institute
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $107,714,396
- Expenses
- $103,358,614
- Assets
- $167,560,889
- Liabilities
- $30,715,070
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
29 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WILLIAM M DOWNS (PRESIDENT (THRU 2/2025))
- NATHANIEL EVANS (VP, ADVANCEMENT/INTERIM PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- WILLIAM M DOWNS (PRESIDENT (THRU 2/2025)): $564,328 total reported compensation
- ANDREW GOODRICH (VP FOR ATHLETICS): $226,730 total reported compensation
- CHRISTOPHER REISERT (FOOTBALL COACH): $223,196 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Gardner-Webb University provides a transformative, Christ-centered education that prepares students for lives of purpose and service.
What it reported doing in 2024
The primary goal of gardner-webb university is to provide education to students. The university offers undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral degrees. The university enrolled approximately 3,000 students during 2024-2025 and awarded approximately $32m in scholarships and tuition assistance.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 91% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 61% for direct work, and 39% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.4%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.62; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 90.4% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $91.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $564K · 29 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $10.8M reported
- Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
- Schedules: 12 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.